What Happened to the Armchair Environmentalists and Climate Alarmists When the Hurricanes Hit?

Guest Opinion: Dr. Tim Ball

There are two ways to get ahead. Pull yourself up or push other people down. There are few better exponents of the pushdown option than the environmental groups and their supporters. They are, for the most part, urban guerrillas, useless people who do little or nothing except undermine the lives of others. They are the green bullies who tell others how to live, yet, hypocritically, live in similar lifestyles. Of course, in the case of Al Gore and Leonardo DiCaprio, they live energy gobbling lifestyles beyond the imagination of those they condemn. This includes going to the point where they destroy people’s lives, economies, and communities. Trump talks about the loss of businesses across the US but needs to note that much is due to the work of environmentalists and politicians at all levels.

Where was Greenpeace during the recent hurricanes? I went to the American Greenpeace web page to find out what they were doing to assist people afflicted by the recent hurricanes. Their US web site says nothing about help. I thought a tag that read “What We’re Doing” would list places where you could donate, plans to send supplies and other rescue efforts. All it did was list six things such as “Fighting Global Warming” and “Saving the Arctic.” The only request about paying was a headline under a picture of an ExxonMobil storage tank that read, “Make fossil fuel companies pay for hurricane destruction.” This implies they believe that human CO2 mostly created by burning fossil fuels is responsible for the hurricanes. They don’t present any evidence to support this claim. Of course, they can’t present evidence because it doesn’t exist.

The web site expects you to send them money for doing nothing to help the people affected. Instead, they point fingers from their urban armchairs at the energy companies that provided the fuel for the people to head down the highway away from danger. While real, employed, hard-working people were doing remarkable things to save lives and help others, Greenpeace asked for money to undermine their economy and further destroy their lives. The problem is Greenpeace is not alone. Most environmental groups, do little more than collect amounts of money, so much of which goes to further destroy jobs and the economy.

They are aided and abetted by political leaders at all levels and of all stripes. These politicians fulfill H.L. Mencken’s observation that,

The whole aim of practical politics is to keep the populace alarmed (and hence clamorous to be led to safety) by menacing it with an endless series of hobgoblins all of them imaginary.

Notice that the only leader to act decisively and effectively was the White House. All the critics could do was make fun of Melania’s shoes, but they even got that story wrong. A real measure of the White House success was that there were virtually no stories about the impact of the hurricane or of people who suffered any more than was necessary. This was because they would have to report how successful the effort was.

Trump is one of the few leaders to see the fraud that was the Paris Climate Agreement. He is also pulling the plug on all the wasteful and unnecessary expenditures made by other politicians who want to appear good to groups like Greenpeace. The following is a classic example of the ignorance, arrogance, and wrong thinking in a recent report about the preparedness of US urban areas for global warming.

In an article titled “The Best US Cities to Live in to Escape the Worst Effects of Climate Change” the author writes.

“The bottom line is it’s going to be bad everywhere,” Bruce Riordan, the director of the Climate Readiness Institute at the University of California Berkeley, told Business Insider. “It’s a matter of who gets organized around this.” Still, there are some cities with a better chance of surviving the onslaught of a warmer planet, Vivek Shandas, an urban-planning professor at Portland State University, told Business Insider. “There are places that might at least temper the effects of climate change,” he said.

-and-

The Pacific Northwest is the best overall US region for escaping the brunt of climate change, Shandas said. Cities in the area aren’t perfect — “they have other challenges,” he said, but added that “their infrastructure tends to be newer and more resilient to major shocks.” That’s is key when it comes to coping with heat and rising water. Seattle is one of the most “well-positioned” of these cities, Shandas said.

-and-

Portland was the first US city to come up with a plan to prepare for climate change. The city’s historic Climate Action Plan, created in 1993, is a set of policies and initiatives aimed at slashing the city’s carbon emissions. The goal is to cut them 40% by 2030 and 80% by 2050.

I assume Seattle is prepared for sea level rise better than Denver or they are prepared for a stampede from California’s the heat increases there. These comments only bear consideration because they are so ignorant.

I learned a great deal about these urban guerrillas over forty years of working with primary producers like farmers, foresters, and fishermen. No, I won’t be politically correct and call them fishers. Sensible, intelligent, people know it is an inclusive generalist term. My experience is that few groups, especially those in urban areas know or care more about the environment and climate. It affects their daily lives, their homes, children, and income.

Trump talks about the Washington Swamp, but for most rural primary producers every urban area is an ungrateful, ignorant, swamp. We can define the Washington Beltway as the distance that swamp dwellers can see. Maurice Strong knew what he was doing when he set up the global warming deception through the bureaucrats who live in the swamp. The distortions this creates are evident in the weather forecasts. On a regular basis, you hear forecasts offering sunshine and heat when the crops and farmers need cool and rain. It occurred this summer when the entire focus was on the plight of the urbanites forced to flee the hurricanes. Meanwhile, few know about the drought that has affected the crops and everything else in the north-central US. I recall one summer in Manitoba Canada when urban dwellers complained bitterly about the weather. It was sunny all week and rained every weekend jokes appeared that asked, “What do you call it after two days of rain?” Answer, “Monday.” “What do you call it if it rains on Monday?” Answer; “A long weekend.” Farmers loved the summer as they could work in the fields and spend the weekends with their families as the rain nourished their crops.

Urbanites criticize primary producers for changing and damaging the environment, but the only place on Earth was a human-induced warming is attributable and measurable is in the urban heat island effect (UHIE). They blame the rural people for pollution and overuse of chemicals. The problem is the highest levels of pollution and concentration of waste are in the urban areas, and immediate surrounding farmlands used as landfills and hazardous waste dumps in classic, not in my backyard (NIMBY) exploitation. In fact, in most regions farmers are not replacing the chemicals they take from the ground and send to the urbanites as food. Les Henry, a Saskatchewan soil specialist, told me that across the Canadian Prairies they had not replaced 50 percent of the nitrogen taken from the soil. Part of the reason is cost, but a major part is a false concern created by urbanites accusing them of using too many chemicals.

The biggest hypocrisy is that urban areas only developed because the rural areas produced a surplus of food. It is the origin of the word civilization, but now, as they become detached from the production process they become less civilized. As we became urbanized, most people forgot that the society only exists because of that surplus. Many years ago, I coined the phrase that “there are no farms in the city, but no city without farms.”

In the year 2000, I was speaking to approximately 1000 farmers in Lloydminster on the Saskatchewan/Alberta border. Their concern was the drought decimating their crops, and forcing many to slaughter cattle they could no longer support. Politicians and urbanites were not listening, or even aware of their plight. I pointed out that about 60 percent of the people in Toronto were not even born in Canada. They represented a bigger vote pool than most of the farmers on the Prairies. It is another measure of the genius of the US Founding Fathers who recognized these inequities and created the Electoral College. Canada is still coping with the monarchical system that puts all the power in the urban areas.

One farmer got up and asked me what I thought they should do. I said the problem requires a solution they would never consider because of who they are and what makes them cope. They must get together and announce they are not planting a crop or sending any animals or byproducts to the urban areas. The irony is society considers farmers conservative, but they are the biggest risk takers. Every time they plant a crop they are at the mercy of the vagaries of weather and nature.

In 1786 Thomas Jefferson expressed the difference between primary producers and the urban dweller.

“An industrious farmer occupies a more dignified place in the scale of beings, whether moral or political, than a lazy lounger, valuing himself or his family, too proud to work, and drawing out a miserable existence by eating on that surplus of other men’s labor which is the sacred fund of the helpless poor.”

Jefferson’s description is almost identical to the derogatory dictionary definition of a parasite.

“• derogatory a person who habitually relies on or exploits others and gives nothing in return.”

I watched and was directly involved with what happens when Greenpeace target an issue they deem unacceptable. One of the jobs we did in anti-submarine patrol out of Summerside, Prince Edward Island, was monitoring the annual seal hunt in the Gulf of St Lawrence. This hunt for seals for food and clothing is centuries old, an extremely dangerous and miserable job for extremely low pay. It was the sole source of income for hundreds of the people in Newfoundland and Labrador.

The idea is to get your ship locked in the ice then do daily hunts across the ice. Greenpeace decided this had to stop and began a campaign with staged videos of the hunting method designed to not mar the skin. Besides depriving a hunt that was carefully monitored and provided basic livelihoods, they did more harm than good. For example, they went out on the ice and sprayed green dye spots on the seals to make the pelt worthless. The problem is this destroyed the seal’s camouflage. Seagulls swooped in and killed them by pecking their eyes out. I watched Orca (Killer whales) come up under the ice and break through to capture seals.

The Newfoundlanders responded with great skill and humor as ordinary working people do. Greenpeace claimed they were defending the seals. The Newfoundlanders said the seals ate the Cod and somebody needed to defend the Cod. They formed a group called Codpiece. To further amplify their focus on the hunt, Greenpeace were part of arranging a visit from Brigitte Bardot to witness first-hand what was happening. Newfoundlanders offered to help in their friendly way. Witness what they did when aircraft landed there during 9/11. They said Ms. Bardot needed appropriate clothing for the cold, wet and slippery conditions involved. Only after she came back off the ice did they inform her that the boots and clothing were made from sealskins.

I used to ask where the Sierra Club was when the forest fires were burning? Similarly, I asked where was Greenpeace when the hurricanes hit? Indeed, where are any of the parasitic environmentalists when disasters hit? They are usually sitting in their armchairs blaming those dealing with the problem and planning more destruction. But, based on what I witnessed when they became involved, it is better they stay home. What we need to do, like the people of Newfoundland and Labrador is expose and ridicule their misinformation, lack of understanding, and document the enormous damage they do to people’s economies and lives, by pushing other people down.

0 0 votes
Article Rating

Discover more from Watts Up With That?

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

146 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Latitude
September 30, 2017 7:24 am

They are all a tad out of control….
Antifa is planning a new round of nationwide riots on November 4 as part of a plot to start a “civil war” that will lead to the overthrow of the Trump administration.
Far-left militants plan to “gather in the streets and public squares of cities and towns across this country” in the hope of building momentum for civil unrest that leads to nothing less than domestic regime change.
https://www.infowars.com/antifa-plans-civil-war-to-overthrow-the-government/

CD in Wisconsin
Reply to  Latitude
September 30, 2017 8:47 am

“…..Antifa is planning a new round of nationwide riots on November 4 as part of a plot to start a “civil war” that will lead to the overthrow of the Trump administration…..”.
Definition of treason:
1 :the offense of attempting by overt acts to overthrow the government of the state to which the offender owes allegiance or to kill or personally injure the sovereign or the sovereign’s family.
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/treason.

Sheri
Reply to  CD in Wisconsin
September 30, 2017 10:58 am

That “civil war” has been years in the making and both sides seem very comfortable with the idea. Right wing sites are filled with people saying “bring it” and left wing sites are filled with people saying “We’re coming”. The comments indicate these people are very, very eager for this. I don’t think Trump being president is anything but a coincidence. Had Hillary been elected, we’d be going there anyway. The division of America started decades agao, probably in the 60’s and Obama gave it that last big push.
If only climate change was our biggest problem as the media claims.

Reply to  CD in Wisconsin
September 30, 2017 11:51 am

Sheri,
what do you define as right wing?

Bryan A
Reply to  CD in Wisconsin
September 30, 2017 11:54 am

Need to get signage in every news clip from devastation site broadcast footage asking “Where’s the help from _______________?”
Greenpeace
Sierra Club
WWF
Etc…

Sheri
Reply to  CD in Wisconsin
September 30, 2017 1:13 pm

HotScot: Sites that claim to be conservative, even if they are not, people who think for themselves at least once in a while, people who loved Reagan. Technically, people who like JFK fall int that catagory—that was before the Left went socialist full on. That’s the best I can do. Most definitions are all blurred and the goals of both sides are the pretty much the same—to wipe out the opposition, however they define it, and own the country. Definitions can be used against one’s own followers, too. Very fluid.

TA
Reply to  CD in Wisconsin
September 30, 2017 1:38 pm

“The division of America started decades ago, probably in the 60’s and Obama gave it that last big push.”
That’s right, Sheri.
The Vietnam war was the first time that reporters took the side of the Left in a big, public way, and used propaganda and lies to push the anti-war narrative and divide the American nation.
Before the Vietnam war, the MSM (a much smaller MSM than now) reported the news fairly straight. No huge bias towards either Left or Right, although they were pro-Kennedy and anti-Nixon during the 1960 elections, but their criticisms of Nixon were very mild compared to today (they made fun of Nixon sweating profusely on camera during one of the debates), but they didn’t make up lies about Nixon to harm him, like they are doing today against Trump.
Kennedy won the election that year. Both Kennedy and Nixon were in support of the war in South Vietnam, fearing a communist “domino effect” that might spread to the whole of Southeast Asia and even India, if something wasn’t done to stop it. Communism, at that time, was on the march all over the globe.
The Left and the MSM have never looked back after the Vietnam war, and have made demonizing the Right as their main focus of attention, in order to gain and keep political power.
And they have been doing this “propaganda and lies” against the Right ever since, culminating in the flood of lies being put forth by the MSM today, in order to demonize Trump, and the Right in general.
I actually went to Vietnam because of the lies put out by the MSM. According to the MSM, the American military was barely hanging on by a thread in South Vietnam, and getting beaten at every turn, when they fought against what the MSM described as “the toughest soldiers in the world”, the North Vietnamese and South Vietnamese Viet Cong communists. They called them that, as a method of discouraging Americans and to make Americans give up on the war. All the MSM reporting was focused on this goal throughout the war and continues to this day. Lies and propaganda are legitimate tools as far as the American Left is concerned.
I haven’t seen one Vietnam documentary I would consider even half-way accurate. I haven’t seen the new 10-part series on Vietnam that was recently broadcase on tv yet, but I’m sure that when I do, I will be disapponted in the accuracy of the reporting. If I’m not, it would be the first time.
Remember, the Left owns most of the media, so don’t expect a fair accounting of the Vietnam war from them. If it were a fair accounting, it would be an indictment of the anti-war Left and the MSM, and they can’t have that, so they continue to lie about the Vietnam war all these years later.
I was in the Army, stationed in Wildflecken, Germany, at this time, and I read these daily dire reports of failure by the U.S. in South Vietnam, and said to myself, this can’t be true, because if it were true, then my whole worldview was wrong, so I had to go see for myself because I had to know. So I volunteered to go to South Vietnam in May 1968.
When I got to South Vietnam, I found out that they were all lies and anti-war propaganda. The “toughest soldiers in the world’ were the American troops who kicked the hell out of the North Vietnamese troops and the Viet Cong, throughout the war. My worldview was the correct worldview after all.
General Giap, the Supreme Commander of the North Vietnamese military, and the architect of the war strategy, told a reporter after the war, that the American troops won just about every battle in South Vietnam, but that didn’t matter because North Vietnam had the American anti-war Left and the MSM on their side. He was exactly right.
American troops defeated the North Vietnamese troops and the North Vietnamese finally came to the bargaining table, and after the Peace Accord was signed, South Vietnam was still there as a viable nation with a bright future ahead of it.
Then the anit-war Left in the U.S. Congress just threw away all that blood, sweat, and tears expended in Vietnam, by refusing to come to South Vietnam’s aid after North Vietnam violated the Peace Agreement and again attacked South Vietnam in 1975.
The Left controlled Congress in those days, and it was right after Nixon had resigned over Watergate, so the Left felt imboldened and just turned their backs on South Vietnam and threw them to the wolves. Like Obama did to the Iraqis in 2011. In both cases, millions of innocent people were killed and displaced from their homes as a result.
What is so ironic is that this last attack by North Vietnam in 1975, started out with them sending a large proportion of their fighting forces into northern, South Vietnam, to the point that they created gridlock with every highway, road, and trail jam-packed with North Vietnamese troops and military equipment frozen in place, and unable to move forward or backward, and they were sitting ducks for American B-52 bombers out of Guam.
The B-52’s could have spent about a week or two carpet bombing the stalled North Vietnamese forces and would have for all intents and purposes, wiped them out where they sat, and the war would have been over and North Vietnam would have been in very dire straights with most of their military destroyed.
It would only have taken a short time (hours) to get the B-52’s over the enemy, but the American Left refused to come to the aid of South Vietnam, even though they were legally and morally obligated to do so.
My natural skepticism sent me to Vietnam. I found out that the MSM had been lying all along (like today) and that the MSM was biased, and were not above lying to push this political objective of getting the U.S. out of Vietnam.
Up until then, I thought the MSM was telling it straight but I found out otherwise when I saw it for myself. I have been on a one-man crusade against the Left and especially the MSM, ever since.
I know how dangerous their lies really are to our society and to our allies in the world. In other words, the Left and the MSM, and their lies, put U.S. national security at risk every day because they lie about the true situation.
American Leftists are incapable of defending U.S. national interests. They have proven it time after time, Obama being the latest example of the delusional thinking taking place in Leftist’s minds. The Iraq war was won, then Obama sat there and twiddled his thumbs while the Islamic Terror Army attacked and gained in strength and territory every day, displacing and killing millions of innocent people in the process. Obama acted like an innocent bystander and never took any serious measures to stop the terroirsts. It was almost like he was on the terrorists side, not our side.
So the big divisions in the U.S. did start during the Vietnam war, and the Left continues to divide us to this very day, epitomized again by Barack Obama and his racebaiting and identity politics.
One bright spot is the public is on to the MSM now. They know they are a bunch of partisan, political liars. The Left and the MSM still have millions of people fooled, but there are millions more who are no longer fooled, Trump’s election demostrates this.
We should all get down on our knees and thank God that Trump got into Office. Only a person like him, vulgar and brash as he is, could take on the Left and the MSM successfully and win this battle. If he wins, we all win. We all need to stand up and fight the false narratives and distorted realities put out by the Left and the MSM, if we value our personal freedoms.

effinayright
Reply to  CD in Wisconsin
September 30, 2017 2:42 pm

It’s NOT the Constitutional definition of Treason, which is the only one that counts.
“Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort. No Person shall be convicted of Treason unless on the Testimony of two Witnesses to the same overt Act, or on Confession in open Court.”
You will find NO US court willing to entertain a treason indictment against these antifa morons. Maybe indictments for inciting immediate violence, engaging in actual violence or the like, but not “treason”.

Ron Long
Reply to  CD in Wisconsin
September 30, 2017 3:52 pm

Antifa won’t be causing trouble in Reno. TA, correct you are about the MSM and VietNam reporting. Thank you for your service. I was in VietNam in 1969. There essentially were no Viet Cong, it was all North Vietnamese Army and some Chinese advisors. The MSM has stayed far left ever after. If you think CNN is biased, tune into CNN International. It looks like CNN INT is providing talking points to not only the global warming crowd but also ISIS, North Korea, and EU. Why do they do this? Business. They have identified a niche for themselves and they will ride thar train to the end of the tracks. Global Warming? An easy sell to their followers because it is evil Americans and their SUV’s causing the problem. Reality? Inconvinient!

Reply to  CD in Wisconsin
September 30, 2017 6:09 pm

Wow, TA you hit the nail on the head. I was in Vietnam in 1968-1969.
If you want to hear what a true conservative is (a constitutional conservative),
listen to this podcast from the Mark Levin Show:
http://www.marklevinshow.com/audio-rewind/
click on 9/28/17, the early commercials are zapped. You only have to listen to the 1st 10-15 minutes of it to get the gist of it…more if you want to learn more…

Reply to  CD in Wisconsin
September 30, 2017 6:31 pm

@TA
And thanks for creating common sense paragraphs so that I could read the whole thing. Some make one giant paragraph when posting, and I automatically skip over those…just sayin…

TA
Reply to  CD in Wisconsin
October 1, 2017 7:57 pm

Ron Long wrote: “TA, correct you are about the MSM and VietNam reporting. Thank you for your service. I was in VietNam in 1969. There essentially were no Viet Cong, it was all North Vietnamese Army and some Chinese advisors.”
And thank *you* for *your* service, Ron. 🙂 I was there from May 1968 to Dec. 1969.
The Viet Cong screwed up badly! They must have been reading American anti-war propaganda reporting, which kept saying the U.S. was on the ropes in South Vietnam, and about to be kicked out of the country in defeat by the communists. The American anti-war Left did this in an effort to demoralize the American public and get them to give up on the war.
The North Vietnamese and the South Vietnamese Viet Cong communists launched the country-wide Tet Offensive in Feb. 1968, where they simultaneously attacked just about every city and town in South Vietnam. The biggest attack of the entire war.
Newspaper reports of this huge Tet Offensive attack by North Vietnam was the source of the dire predictions of how the war was going, that I kept reading over in Germany.
According to the propaganda, the U.S. was getting its butt kicked, and that’s what I questioned, and what caused me to go and see for myself.
The Viet Cong apparently believed all this propaganda, and were certain of their victory over the Americans, and so they came out of hiding for the first time during the war.
Before this big attack, the Viet Cong remained hidden among the South Vietnamese population and operated like terrorists do today with hit and run attacks, and then they would go back into hiding until the next attack.
But they thought they were going to win this Tet battle and so they would no longer need to remain anonymous. When they finally came out of hiding American troops decimated them to the point that they were no longer a viable fighting force, and it remained that way until the end.
The Tet Offensive turned out to be a huge defeat for the North Vietnamese. After it became clear to the public that they had been beaten badly, the North Vietnamese thought they needed to prove they were still a viable force, and launched a smaller country-wide attack which was called “mini-Tet” in May 1968.
This second attack was much less potent than the first and again the North Vietnamese were beaten badly by American troops. They lost every battle but you couldn’t tell it by reading the American anti-war MSM.
Those Viet Cong messed up bigtime believing all that anti-war propaganda, came out of hiding, and were wiped out by American troops. That’s what they get for believing the American anti-war Left and the MSM.
Yeah, they thought they were going to win this one. I guess they didn’t realize they were going up against the “toughest troops in the world”: The Americans.

TA
Reply to  CD in Wisconsin
October 1, 2017 8:03 pm

J. Philip Peterson wrote:
“Wow, TA you hit the nail on the head. I was in Vietnam in 1968-1969.”
And thanks for *your* service, J. Philip. 🙂

TA
Reply to  CD in Wisconsin
October 1, 2017 8:07 pm

“@TA
And thanks for creating common sense paragraphs so that I could read the whole thing.”
Yes, I make an effort to make it readable. Huge paragraphs are a definite turnoff to a lot of people.

TA
Reply to  CD in Wisconsin
October 2, 2017 11:55 am

Well, I watched the first two episodes of the new tv series about the Vietnam war and it looks like the same old anti-war propaganda to me.
In episode two they start out by implying the U.S. had no idea what it was doing in South Vietnam and the South Vietnamese did not want the U.S. there to begin with, and wanted to be reunited with North Vietnam. This is classic Vietnam anti-war propaganda, and it’s not true.
The South Vietnamese ran *away* from the North Vietnamese, not to them. And the South Vietnamese today treat American war veterans like they are royalty. Even the North Vietnamese treat returning Americans well.
The South Vietnamese knew Americans were there to help them and appreciated it. And still do.
And the propaganda said that the South Vietnamese government was corrupt and did not deserve America’s support. There *was* corruption in the South Vietamese government but it was no different than any other Southeast Asian nation which were equally corrupt.
The American presence in South Vietnam kept the corrupt government officials in line, and the South Vietnamese were better off for it. And there were many South Vietnamese government officials who were *not* corrupt. Of course, the anti-war Left concentrated only on the bad things.
I only watched about 20 minutes of episode two and that’s what I got from it. The main theme is the U.S. intervention was doomed from the beginning, which is what they have been saying from the beginning.
There was also praise for some prominent Leftwing propagandist reporters, claiming *they* told the truth about Vietnam and how bad it was, while other, lesser reporters were reporting favorably on it.
It all sounds like the anti-Vietnam-war rhetoric the American Left has been putting out since the war began.
I suppose I will watch the rest of the series, although I know it will make me angry.
I ought to get a transcript and set about rebutting every propaganda point they make.
If you want a book that tells the truth about the Vietnam war, go get “Stolen Valor : How the Vietnam Generation Was Robbed of Its Heroes and Its History”.
https://www.amazon.com/Stolen-Valor-Vietnam-Generation-History/dp/096670360X
Going by the new Vietnam war series, it looks the Vietnam Generation is still being Robbed of Its Heroes and Its History”.

philincalifornia
Reply to  Latitude
September 30, 2017 12:10 pm

Not surprising at all that these fascists call themselves anti-fascist. They probably also want virtue signaling dimwits to identify them as “liberal” and “progressive” too.
Yeah, you f-wits, Stalinism is really cool, liberal and progressive, yay.

MarkW
Reply to  philincalifornia
September 30, 2017 2:08 pm

According to them, anyone to the right of socilism, is fascism.
Despite the fact that fascism is actually of form of socialism.
For them it’s become a catchall phrase for anyone they dislike.

Richard Bell
Reply to  philincalifornia
September 30, 2017 4:20 pm

Can anyone explain how a political spectrum defined by one form of totalitarian authoritarianism on the far left and an only slightly different form of totalitarian authoritarianism on the far right has any room for western parliamentary democracies between the two “extremes”?
All that I can think of is that calling fascism a far right ideology is a deception so when the fascists start their coup by pulling the state to the left, all of the socialists will help them drag the state as far as Fascism and the socialists will be surprised when they are rounded up.

catweazle666
Reply to  Richard Bell
September 30, 2017 5:08 pm

Fascists, Socialists and Communists are all Left wing authoritarian/totalitarian regimes.
The fact that they all tend to virulently hate each other is irrelevant, in many cases the more similar the ideology the more extreme of the antipathy of its adherents to almost identical ideologies, take the traditional and extremely bloody conflicts between Catholic and Protestant Christians or Shia and Sunni Muslims, for example.
Right wing beliefs are Libertarian, believing in small government, personal responsibility and low taxation, at the extreme Right are the Anarchists, superficially similar to the extremists of the Left but generally more spontaneous and disorganised, mostly simply into anti-authoritarianism and sticking it to ‘The Man’.

Wally
Reply to  philincalifornia
September 30, 2017 9:32 pm

ANTIFA = vegan ISIS.

BoyfromTottenham
Reply to  Latitude
September 30, 2017 5:01 pm

I think that qualifies as ‘Sedition’ : conduct or speech inciting people to rebel against the authority of a state or monarch.
When is the US going to prosecute these folk, before or after they start a civil war?

Sara
Reply to  BoyfromTottenham
October 1, 2017 6:01 am

When? I found on another site that Antifa and the other rabid leftist groups are now listed as domestic terrorist groups by the US government.
Someone who went undercover to get the real dope on these dopes showed his video later to reporters and they walked away from him. At the end of his video, he asked “Are the media complicit? Or are they just stupid?” That is a very good question. I’d say complicit, myself.
I also saw a video of people blocking traffic on a freeway in Los Angeles – don’t know which one – holding up signs that read ‘November 4 It Starts’. Whatever they’re planning to do, it will be destructive.

john
September 30, 2017 7:39 am

Well done Dr. Ball!
Maybe they could give these folks a small island in the Caribbean where they can live the life they profess without any outside assistance. The only thing allowed are a couple of goats, chickens, and several axes/machete’s. No one in, no one out in their little utopia.

Reply to  john
September 30, 2017 8:17 am

It would never work because Greenpeace and their ilk wouldn’t have anyone to scold and rebuke; their primary reason for living.

Bengt Abelsson
Reply to  john
September 30, 2017 8:52 am

Well, the steel in the axes/machetes have to come from somewhere – and CO2 have been released during that process, so no, steel may not be used by a true believer.

Tom Halla
Reply to  Bengt Abelsson
September 30, 2017 9:00 am

Get very nasty and give them pile of obsidian. Or be even nastier and let them try to find suitable stone for tools before they starve.

Bryan A
Reply to  john
September 30, 2017 11:58 am

No animals for food…raising animals for food creates the release of both CO2 and Methane CH4 and requires additional plant growth for their feed

ratuma
Reply to  Bryan A
September 30, 2017 12:04 pm

just for their suffering

Vicus
Reply to  Bryan A
September 30, 2017 1:05 pm

Humans require mammalian meat…

Akatsukami
Reply to  Bryan A
September 30, 2017 3:06 pm

But do environmentalists?

Walt D.
September 30, 2017 7:41 am

They are carpetbaggers.

Curious George
September 30, 2017 7:43 am

Did you expect anything else? Work is the last desperate way to get money…

September 30, 2017 8:04 am

Excellent article Dr. Ball!
As an operational meteorologist that predicts crop yields and production based on real weather(not models) and other factors(increasing CO2) as well as energy use, it’s mind boggling to see the massive disconnect between the narrative of catastrophic human caused climate change and extreme weather we hear about………..and the actual weather that we’ve been having.
There has been nothing unusually extreme about our weather recently.
The last 40 years have featured the best weather/climate and CO2 for most life on this greening planet, in at least 1,000 years, since the Medieval Warm Period that was this warm globally.
There was a lot of sensationalizing of 2015 and 2016 being the hottest years ever because of increasing CO2………..even as they completely missed the most important news.
Crop yields and world food production kept setting records. Not despite those conditions being hyped as disastrous but BECAUSE of them.
This one graph shows it better than words:
“Record cereal production seen boosting global stocks to an all-time high in 2017/18”
http://www.fao.org/worldfoodsituation/csdb/en/
What if fossil fuels never existed, nor CO2 emissions from humans and everything happening today in the atmosphere/oceans/land and biosphere were exactly the same?
Since humans would not have an agenda based on cutting CO2 emissions, what would be our response to the exact same weather/climate?
Undoubtedly, the benefits of CO2 and global warming would be getting much more press time. Natural climate change and cycles, which have been replaced by “human caused” would be discussed. Maybe we would recognize the need for adaptation along the sea coasts, where the increase in sea levels has been around 1 inch/decade for over a century.
These extreme events recently, like the hurricanes would be put into proper context and compared to similar extreme events and hurricanes in the past………not sold as unprecedented from human caused climate change.

J Tull
Reply to  Mike Maguire
September 30, 2017 8:19 am

What are the chances of early frost this fall in the upper plains and late frosts next spring in upper latitudes?

Reply to  J Tull
September 30, 2017 8:08 pm

JTull,
A frost at this time of year in the Northern Plains would not be considered early but instead close to average:
https://bonnieplants.com/library/first-and-last-frost-dates/
Probably some frost this week for the high plains of the Dakotas. With regards to next Spring, I don’t usually do much seasonal forecasting, sticking mostly to 2 weeks. However, I have slightly elevated odds of this Winter being colder than average, especially in the Plains eastward because of the recent tendency for the upper level ridge west/trough east couplet.
Also, odds of a La Nina this Winter look decent and that pattern is often a strong feature for La Nina Winters.
What does that mean for next Spring? Don’t know. Damage from late Spring frosts are often more the result of unusual warmth in early Spring. This causes many plants to come out of dormancy early, including the Winter wheat.
Sometimes a cold March, that delays development, decreases the risk of a late frost doing damage.
Of course corn and soybean farmers would prefer the warm and dry early Spring to get planting underway early.
2 years ago, we had a very mild Winter because of the strong El Nino blowing mild, dried out oceanic air masses across the country with a zonal, west to east jet stream…….cutting off(diverting) the cold northern jet stream to the north.
Last Winter, the small but key region that we use to determine El Nino/La Nina was neutral but the Pacific Ocean overall acted like it does during a strong El Nino. That’s why California got bombed with numerous drought busting storms. The same flow caused much of the country to be mild much of the time.
A potential La Nina this Winter increases chances for the opposite kind of Winter coming up.

Reply to  J Tull
October 1, 2017 3:50 am

JT,
We may have some hard freezes coming for the N.Plains to Upper Midwst early in week 2 of the forecast.

Reply to  Mike Maguire
September 30, 2017 8:30 am

As an operational meteorologist that predicts crop yields and production based on real weather(not models)”
OK, I take that part back. I do use models, including weather models all the time but appreciate the need to RECONCILE the difference between the models and observations/reality on a timely basis in order to move in the right direction with predictions.
Meteorologists are wrong all the time when we forecast weather(and its effects) because our modeling of the chaotic atmosphere and inability to capture initial conditions perfectly, leads to increasing errors with time in modeled output.
But we stay realistically connected to that and make the best adjustments based on the newest, latest information, that replaces yesterdays.
The best busted forecast, is the one that is discarded the quickest.

The Deplorable Vlad the Impaler
Reply to  Mike Maguire
September 30, 2017 10:31 am

I do not believe anyone here has an argument with the aspect that you use models to make forecasts. Part of my long employment history has seen me as Pilot-In-Command of air transport aircraft, which, in turn, has led me to experience forecasts that were invalid before they were made (on occasion).
Not through any fault of the model, per se, but because Nature is a chaotic system (albeit with some “heartbeats” of a regular ‘cycle’, i.e., seasons). As I recall, the Aviation Weather forecasts are revised about every 3 – 6 hours, out of necessity. Something, somewhere, changed, and so the forecasts needed to be updated or revised. It is NOT the fault of the model, the modeler, or anything other than Nature itself, doing what Nature does.
I have no problem with your models predicting temperatures, precipitations, and harvests, since you are willing, unlike the ‘climate modelers’, to discard an inaccurate model and replace it with something based on more current information. You have nothing to answer for, when you are willing to replace a “wrong” forecast with an ‘updated’ forecast, based on newer information.
And, just to cap this, I’ve also seen Aviation forecasts that fairly well hit the mark, and allowed us to modify a planned flight to either a different destination, or make the best decision possible. My hat is off to all meteorologists, regardless of their “track record!”
Regards,
Vlad

Reply to  Mike Maguire
September 30, 2017 7:48 pm

Vlad,
Appreciate the comments and understanding. You can often tell when a local National Weather Service forecast is likely regurgitating the computer guidance. I just copied this one from Des Moines IA.
Sunday Night:
“A slight chance of showers before 1am, then a chance of showers and thunderstorms between 1am and 4am, then a chance of showers after 4am”
If you go to the hourly weather forecast from the computer generated products, that’s exactly what it shows. A human, looking at weather maps, would never be so precise with exact, hourly times assigned to specific weather conditions that change 3 times during just one, 12 hour forecast period. A human would state something like, “a chance of showers and possibly a thunderstorm”.
It seems a bit much to me when they have a precise forecast like that for a period a couple of days out. It implies pinpoint precision skills that exceed the ability to deliver with consistency.
However, it may actually be useful in some cases. For instance, a person with an outdoor event 2 days from now at 2 pm that needs dry weather can plan better if the forecast has the rain chances before 1pm, then no rain from 1pm-4pm vs a human stating a chance of rain that afternoon.
Not that we can forecast the rain chances ending or beginning with such accuracy but the product user will understand that rain chances will drop off or begin around those time frames and hopefully, should realize they are give or take a couple of hours.
With climate models, I think that one of the biggest problems is that they are presented as yielding products that have more skill than is possible.
They are useful in showing a range of potential outcomes based on various scenarios. But there are way too many unknowns which play a role in the outcome to assign the level of skill that too many people assume they have when using them.

jvcstone
Reply to  Mike Maguire
September 30, 2017 12:35 pm

“What if fossil fuels never existed”
Mr.Maguire. If fossil fuels had never existed, I doubt very much there would be much of a “modern” society at all

Reply to  jvcstone
September 30, 2017 7:08 pm

True jvcstone,
I should have also added in the hypothetical that another abundant, reliable and cheap energy source was used that did not emit CO2.

September 30, 2017 8:06 am

Greenpeace is evil personified.

Reply to  Phillip Bratby
September 30, 2017 8:15 am

“Never attribute to malice what can be adequately explained as stupidity.”

Latitude
Reply to  Jeroen B.
September 30, 2017 9:13 am

…and a complicit news media

Reply to  Jeroen B.
September 30, 2017 10:28 am

With respect to Greenpeace and others like them, Phillip is correct. They are stupid and act with malice (by their fruits ye shall know them), so yes, they’re evil. They want to corrupt or deprive humanity of that which is good.

climanrecon
Reply to  Phillip Bratby
September 30, 2017 9:36 am

… and their fund-raising publicity stunts are given free front-page advertising by the likes of the BBC, the latest one being stopping a cargo ship with a few VW diesel cars, which was the lead news item on the BBC recently.

Reply to  climanrecon
September 30, 2017 12:02 pm

climanrecon
Should have been nicked for piracy and hung from the nearest yardarm.

Barbara
Reply to  Phillip Bratby
September 30, 2017 3:05 pm

Greenpeace has been and is a very useful tool for promoting the U.N. Global Green Economy agenda.
IMO, this is the reason why they were allowed to run roughshod over Europeans. Now it’s North America’s turn but the U.S. does have laws to cope with groups such as Greenpeace.

Ron Long
September 30, 2017 8:08 am

Great Report. Also, as here in Argentina, environmentalists are useful fools that corrupt politicians like to place in front of them to legitimize their actions. This gives the environmentalists instant status as saviors, whereas they are simply enablers. GreenPeace has stated that their recruiting efforts in some countries are much easier than in others. I wonder why.

Tom Halla
September 30, 2017 8:09 am

Nice commentary.

September 30, 2017 8:22 am

Great as usual, Dr. Ball.
But I’m a unclear with the Bridgett Bardot 9/11 thing.
Did her plane have to land in the area on 9/11 and then Greenpeace arrange for her to go out to a seal hunt?

John MacDonald
Reply to  Gunga Din
September 30, 2017 11:23 am

Gunga, two separate events.
On 9-11, Newfoundlanders in Gander and surrounding communities hosted many grounded aircraft at the former WW2 airfield.
Bardow visited the ice in the 70s or 80s. She helped GP create all sorts of havoc that still ripples today.

Reply to  John MacDonald
September 30, 2017 11:51 am

Thanks for the clarification. The post seemed to relate both events.
Perhaps “Witness what they did when aircraft landed there during 9/11.” should be a parenthesis?

Reply to  Gunga Din
September 30, 2017 12:06 pm

Pity they hadn’t told Bardot her clothes were sealskin when she was in the middle of an ice field.

September 30, 2017 8:31 am

read the book “why nations fail” and learn how through history elites have extracted wealth from the masses by slavery and serfdom. Read how elites enriched themselves by selling monopolies to their friends while blocking innovations that would increase prosperity for all.
Realize the striking similarities now : renewables will create a new class of poor. Nuclear energy is blocked.
The green movement truly is a revolt of the new elites.

drednicolson
Reply to  David
September 30, 2017 12:38 pm

Human history is a long chain of Big Kids making Big Messes, while the longsuffering adults clean them up as best they may.

September 30, 2017 8:35 am

Thank you Tim – another great article!
Best, Allan
https://wattsupwiththat.com/2017/09/25/is-climate-lukewarmism-legitimate/comment-page-1/#comment-2622572
Several trillion dollars of public funds have been squandered on global warming hysteria. There never was any evidence that climate sensitivity to increasing CO2 was high enough to cause dangerous global warming. Claims of wilder weather, etc. are pure fiction. Global warming alarmism is a failed hypothesis.
Since 1940 there has been ~22 years of positive correlation of temperature with CO2, and ~55 years of negative or ~zero correlation. The global warming hypo is contradicted by a full-Earth-scale test since 1940, when fossil fuel combustion accelerated. CO2 is NOT a significant driver of global warming.
The leading advocates of global warming hysteria and their institutions have profited handsomely from this obvious sc@m. What will dissuade them are huge lawsuits under civil RICO in the USA, and class action lawsuits elsewhere.

Reply to  Allan MacRae
September 30, 2017 12:41 pm

“What will dissuade them are huge lawsuits under civil RICO in the USA, and class action lawsuits elsewhere.”
Sadly, Allan, that will never happen as politicians are nothing more than a committee. A committee is deliberately designed so proceeding with, or obstructing a decision, is a shared activity and therefore non attributable to an individual. Not that I think you don’t know all this.
Committees cower behind the concept of democracy, but they themselves are small groups of fascists who determine the direction of the lives of others. They cite the rights of minority groups (as an example) to uphold their ludicrous decisions, but never produce the hard numbers to support those decisions, merely that one or other minority group might suffer inconvenience, whilst the majority are inconvenienced.
So the western world is being dragged into rule by the minority, over the majority. And whilst that might seem alarmist, it’s a genuine concern particularly relevant to immigration and the growing enclaves of cultural and religious groups in our midst who refuse to conform to the cultural or legal norms of our respective countries.
In the UK there are numerous examples of this behaviour, more in Europe.

Hans
Reply to  HotScot
September 30, 2017 1:31 pm

Unfortunately I agree with your assessment.
Not enough introspection in this world.
+10000000000000

Reply to  HotScot
September 30, 2017 1:48 pm

Hans
Unfortunately, we are the eyes and ears.
Politicians are the voice, which represents one fifth of the function of a head.
Even the head of an individual can be overcome by it’s minority constituent.

Reply to  HotScot
September 30, 2017 8:15 pm

HotScot and Hans,
The first civil RICO lawsuit against warmists has already been filed earlier this year, as I predicted circa 2014.
Don’t bet against my predictive track record – it is excellent to date.
Best, Allan 🙂
https://wattsupwiththat.com/2017/08/08/down-with-internet-gatekeepers/#comment-2575054
I posted the following in 2014 – at least one civil RICO lawsuit has since been filed, but this field is open to many more such lawsuits. Global warming alarmism is a trillion-dollar industry based on fr@ud.
Under civil RICO, target warmist institutions with money – such as universities that profited from billions in funding for phony warmist research.
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2014/09/21/salmon-climate-and-accountability/#comment-1743671
I suggest that someone is going to sue these warmist fr@udsters in the USA, probably using the civil RICO statutes.
Watch for it…
Best, Allan

Reply to  HotScot
October 2, 2017 9:19 am

Allan MacRae
fingers crossed. Keep us updated.

prjindigo
September 30, 2017 8:35 am

they were busy wasting gas for water

September 30, 2017 8:56 am

parasitism is widely practised in nature as a profitable business model. Windmills and solar panels are parasites of fossil energy.

Sheri
Reply to  David
September 30, 2017 1:15 pm

It’s profitable until you run out of hosts.

gnomish
Reply to  Sheri
September 30, 2017 1:38 pm

and that is the function of government- to farm raise their prey.

ratuma
September 30, 2017 8:56 am
Moderately Cross of East Anglia
September 30, 2017 9:10 am

An excellent critique of Greenpeace and the like. What infuriates me is that in the UK Greenpeace and the WWF (which is engaged by proxy in illegal deforestation and murdering indigenous forest dwellers) are give charitable status so that they enjoy huge tax breaks. What a scandal for organizations which are now wreaking tremendous harm to human progress by grotesquely stupid opposition to scientific progress.

Reply to  Moderately Cross of East Anglia
September 30, 2017 12:47 pm

Moderately Cross of East Anglia
I think you’ll find that since Cameron’s promised ‘bonfire of the quango’s’ innumerable charities popped up, propped up by government grants/tax breaks etc., virtually all of them performing similar roles to those of the quango’s.
Without government support few of them would survive, but they are utilised as lobbying instruments, hence government support. And of course, no one can object to a ‘charity’.

Vicus
Reply to  HotScot
September 30, 2017 1:12 pm

Don’t forget ‘institute’ and ‘non-profit’ used to bally round legitimacy.

MarkW
Reply to  HotScot
September 30, 2017 2:14 pm

I bought a box of sugar recently, on the back were panels proclaiming that the sugar was both vegan and gluten free.
The stupid, it burns.

climanrecon
September 30, 2017 9:44 am

In the UK farmers are under sustained assault from the urban right-on “green” brigade, led by the likes of the BBC Countryfile programme, which used to treat farmers as heroes, but now only if they host wind farms, solar panels, are totally organic, and declare carbon sequestration and bio-diversity as their main purposes.

Reply to  climanrecon
September 30, 2017 12:55 pm

Organic farming. A luxury of the western elite.
Meanwhile, organic farmers in developing countries are living at subsistence level, forced to operate without fertilisers and pesticides that would benefit their entire community.
I never buy organic produce, it’s inhumane.

drednicolson
Reply to  HotScot
September 30, 2017 2:09 pm

I make an exception for local farmers’ markets, who’ve grown the produce themselves and whatever money I spend goes from my hand straight to theirs. Of course, local does not necessarily mean organic, just usually. Many of them aren’t even full-fledged farmers. Farmers’ spouses selling the excess from their home gardens, for example, or the hobbyist beekeeper with a couple boxes of honey jars to offer.

Reply to  HotScot
September 30, 2017 4:13 pm

drednicolson
I should probably have qualified my statement. Commercial organic farming is a con.
Home produced goods are a normal way of life, but not in the suburbs. Supermarkets are usually the only meaningful source of produce in the suburbs, the closest most people will come to the country.
As a kid I used to milk the cows, bottle the milk, and deliver it to a community, within 3 hours. Unpasteurised, and with thick cream at the top of the bottle. No problem and not expensive. We used to carve Halloween turnips into lanterns before pumpkins were ever available in the UK. Now, turnips sold in supermarkets are a fraction of the size they were. We harvested the grain crops with a Massey Ferguson tractor pulling a primitive harvester with a tractor pulled trailer beside it collecting the grain.
We were what would be described today as illegal child labour. But we loved it. Money wasn’t the point, working was the point.
The farm I worked on has been turned into a trendy housing development.

Catcracking
September 30, 2017 9:51 am

Excellent article, submit to the NYT for publication

DHR
September 30, 2017 10:02 am

Vivek Shandas says Seattle is well prepared for sea level rise. Perhaps it is, simply because of its topography but also because there is little or no sea level rise there. PSMSL .org tide gauge data reveals seas at the shoreline rising at a rate of about 1 or 1 1/2 mm/yr while a city GPS elevation gauge shows land subsiding at about 1 mm/yr for a net rise of somewhere between 0 and 1/2 mm/yr. This should suffice for several hundred years. All this due no doubt to the wise choices of its Democratic government.

Tom Judd
Reply to  DHR
September 30, 2017 12:20 pm

I think Seattle should be a lot more concerned and prepared for the possibility (probability?) that Mt. Rainier blows its stack than it should be about the effects ICE powered commuters around town may have on the sea levels in its harbors.

Reply to  Tom Judd
October 3, 2017 10:26 am

The Cascadian quake ought to due nicely..

Reply to  DHR
September 30, 2017 1:01 pm

DHR
Hang on.
If the sea is rising by 1 or 1.5mm per year, and the land is subsiding by 1mm a year, doesn’t that mean that sea level is rising by 1.5mm per year, irrespective of what the land is doing?
And relative to each other, wouldn’t the combined effect be that the tide will be 2mm to 2.5mm higher every year?
Or did I totally misinterpret your post?

Paul Watkinson
Reply to  HotScot
September 30, 2017 5:12 pm

You misunderstand. The tide gauge is mounted on the falling land and therefor it’s readings are a sum of actual SLR plus land subsidence. Actual SLR is thus Reading less subsidence.

GoatGuy
September 30, 2017 10:04 am

To me, its kind of like the über-clean Swiss neighbors who bîtch and complain endlessly about our practice of leaving our curbside trash bins out for the full day following pickup. Like it matters. Yes – we don’t give a fûque. Are WE bad because we choose to not give a fûque? (Most argue, yes. I argue, no: it doesn’t matter.)
The evergreen community wants to make its neighbors first “feel bad” about not doing as much as they are, and ultimately to pass laws requiring neighbors to do as much as they do. Whether the net effect of all their (and eventually our) efforts is quantitatively meaningless or not. They’re on Jihad. Religious belief (and I’d argue real religious belief) that their efforts make them good, pure, righteous people, and their actions, intents and policies are thereby justified.
Well, I have a word for y’all greenies: get over yourselves. When we’re being realistic about the global warming scare, it turns out that there is no SIGNIFICANT THREAT to the numbers bandied about. We’ve warmed, what … +0.7°C in the last 50 years? New England still has a hundred days of winter, folks. Lakes freeze over, and you skate on them. For just as long a ‘season’ every year as 100 years ago. Its documented.
WE ARE FORCED TO LISTEN to a narrative that (just like the 1970s) posits that the World is Coming To An End because of all the bûllsnot that Mankind has been consuming, burning, emitting and polluting.
Well the EPA has quite successfully gotten the bad apples out of the barrel. The – yes, alarming – practices of the pre 1970s are muffled, washed, ensconced, entombed, neutralized, gathered and kept largely out of our waterways, lakes and streams. Our air (thanks to EPA) quality in cities has hugely improved. Our drinking water quality (except for Flint Michigan) has been increasing, generally.
I am not a ranting greenie. I’m a practical environmentalist who knows fees, tariffs, surcharges, taxes, penalties and prison time work well to curb bad apples’ bad behavior. And that’s what we need to do. Not run around with our hair on fire just because the Porlandians have swallowed the Red Pill and gone nuts.
GoatGuy

Reply to  GoatGuy
September 30, 2017 1:18 pm

GoatGuy
In the 1960’s/70’s in the UK, refuse collectors came round to the back of our house to collect the trash (bins as we call them in the UK). There was no need for hulking great plastic bins to litter our pavements.
I now live in a house, forming one of five Victorian cottages. Our bins are conveniently situated within the walled confines of the building, adjacent to the road. It would take seconds for the bin men to walk in and collect them, but no, we are obliged to litter the narrow pavement, on a busy road, outside our house with massive plastic bins.
The bins are rarely collected before 2pm but we are told to leave them on the pavement from 7am.
The sooner they have autonomously operated refuse containers the better. F*ck self driving cars, get our proprieties right!

Windsong
September 30, 2017 10:22 am

A little o/t, but please do not add Seattle to your list of places to move to. The post card images from Elliott Bay are very pretty, but misleading. The City Clowncil of Freattle has turned the downtown area into a giant homeless camp, and the police are prohibited from bothering the campers. (Seriously. See photo in linked article of tents next to courthouse.) My daughter accepted a new job in downtown Seattle in July, 2016, and quit after one year. She couldn’t stand the brutal commute, the constant panhandling walking to her building, and most surprising of all (to me), the frequent lockdown of her building due to some political protest on the sidewalk in front. Unknown to her when she started, the building housed the consulate of some rogue nation, a nation home to some well known contributors to WUWT.*
https://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/crime/judges-complain-its-unsafe-unsanitary-outside-county-courthouse-in-seattle/
*Canada

Chris
Reply to  Windsong
September 30, 2017 11:10 am

The reason your daughter had a brutal commute is because Seattle is the most economically vibrant city in the US right now. It has led the nation in home appreciation for 12 months straight. That’s the price of success, not a terrible city.

Vicus
Reply to  Chris
September 30, 2017 1:16 pm

Seattle, like Denver where I’m from, has turned to trash.
Housing prices do not make a vibrant city, or else you’d be praising up the Hamptons and L.A.

Sheri
Reply to  Chris
September 30, 2017 1:18 pm

How does one have so much homelessness with a “vibrant city”?

Reply to  Chris
September 30, 2017 1:22 pm

Sheri
Because it’s ‘vibrant’, so it’s attractive.
Streets of gold and all that.

MarkW
Reply to  Chris
September 30, 2017 2:20 pm

It also means that the city fathers refuse to do the things necessary to deal with growth. Such as build roads.

MarkW
Reply to  Chris
September 30, 2017 2:22 pm

“Appreciation” is also the result of those same city fathers refusing to let anyone build much new near the city.

drednicolson
Reply to  Chris
September 30, 2017 2:28 pm

So you’re saying that for a year straight, more and more indigent city residents have been priced out of owning a home. No wonder the downtown is one big hobo camp.

Rascal
Reply to  Chris
September 30, 2017 11:13 pm

$1.00 – $2.00 = 100% appreciation.

Bruce Cobb
September 30, 2017 10:29 am

Portland was the first US city to come up with a plan to prepare for climate change. The city’s historic Climate Action Plan, created in 1993, is a set of policies and initiatives aimed at slashing the city’s carbon emissions. The goal is to cut them 40% by 2030 and 80% by 2050.

Interesting. So, the way to “prepare for climate change” is to raise the cost of electricity, raise people’s cost of living, raise taxes, and drive business away. Yeah, good plan.
Come to think of it though, that approach would probably work to prepare for an invasion by space aliens. No self-respecting space alien will attack retarded and deranged people. True fact.

Reply to  Bruce Cobb
September 30, 2017 1:24 pm

Interesting point there.
If every western city did the same, where would people and businesses go?
China and India are options I suppose.

Michael Jankowski
September 30, 2017 10:39 am

…Seattle is one of the most “well-positioned” of these cities, Shandas said…
Not-so-well-positioned for Ranier to blow.

Sara
September 30, 2017 10:44 am

“What we need to do, like the people of Newfoundland and Labrador is expose and ridicule their misinformation, lack of understanding, and document the enormous damage they do to people’s economies and lives, by pushing other people down.”
Best response ever to the problem.
I read a novella some time ago, {don’t remember the author’s name) in which a main ‘character’ was a group called the Statque. It was a governmental body with the sole purpose of maintaining the status quo. Their political rant was that the Universe was in Entropy and declining rapidly, but they had no proof other than a few exploding stars (novae). I thought it was ridiculous then, but when the Greenbeans started up, they appeared to be doing some good. However, this is several decades later and I see only the usual bandwagon and the usual crowd on it, and it’s mostly about getting attention, NOT about doing anything. They really do need their own planet. Maybe Elon Musk can get them to Alpha Centauri B before too long.
We’re probably going to see a lot of changes, mostly prompted by people who may wake up from the state of mindlessness that they’ve been in. Just remember, it was a small child who pointed out that the emperor was wearing no clothing

the old man
September 30, 2017 10:49 am

Being a former rural lad m’self, Tim’s take on the rising urbanised blight and their imposition on the bigger democracy over time rings true to me. Quite a while ago, I took a look at Vancouver from such a perspective:
https://notonmywatch.com/?p=1151

Reply to  the old man
September 30, 2017 12:09 pm

It would seem that the further one is removed from nature, the more they think they know how to “preserve” it.

the old man
Reply to  Gunga Din
September 30, 2017 5:17 pm

Tho they’ve – ( excuse the poetic licence) belted you and flayed you, by the livin’ gawd that made you, You’re a better man than I, Gunga Din. Nothing else needs sayin’…. Just sayin’.

Dan Cebuliak
September 30, 2017 11:05 am

I agree with Dr. Tim Ball. For many years especially after the “Global Warming” crises turned into the “Climate Change” crises which has now morphed into “Climate Chaos” and what ever name that will be used to deceive the public, It was clearly evident that there was an agenda being played out. Under sustainability the hoax was being perpetrated on the people, while governments and corporations did totally the opposite. I was also aware these so called environmental groups were the soft sell of the agenda, and continually questioned along the same lines. It wasnt until 6 years ago I started to study Agenda 21, brought in by the UN and Maurice STrong that I fully comprehended what was going on, and it was less then that warm fuzzy feeling that other groups are pushing I discovered that Transition Towns is also part of that facade, the underside of ICLEI, which is now Governments for Sustainability, a very well cloaked con game…. Dr Tim Ball, thank you for the work you are doing, and I do wish you the very best of luck in dealing with Andrew Weaver, who is also pushing the hoax with his new false sense of power in BC….

1 2 3
Verified by MonsterInsights